Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kingstie

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was withdrawn (rewrite) —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-06-24 22:22Z

[edit] Kingstie

Hoax or unverifiable. Cryptozoology "source" is user-submitted. Delete —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-06-24 21:57Z

• Keep and expand. Referred to on most of the cryptozoology sites [1], [2], [3] - I hesitate to call them "reputable", but it's definitely not a hoax article. Tevildo 22:04, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oooh, CSICOP have given it their imprimatur - [4], last paragraph. A hoax, but a genuine hoax. Tevildo 22:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for the CSICOP link, Tevildo. I will rewrite as description of a genuine hoax. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-06-24 22:21Z

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.